Reply-To: doherty@ucsu.colorado.edu The Denver Post March 16, 1993, pg 1A By Michael Booth, Staff Writer Colorado Srpings attorney Greg Walta yesterday withdrew his highly touted alternative to Amendment 2, saying opposition from gay and mainstream leaders killed any chance of getting the measure on this fall's ballot. Walta said political leaders in Denver, Boulder and Aspen--counting on the courts to overturn Amendment 2 this year--didn't want to commit to the compromise proposal, which would have denied "special rghts" to gays while also guaranteeing them some protection. Gay communities in Denver, Boulder and Aspen objected to the exemptions contained in some protections, refusing to endorse any measure that might compromise their civil rights campaign, Walta and many gay activists said. "What I'm saying is, I think all initiative and referendum efforts for 1993 are dead," Walta said, dismissing chances that other compromise proposals would solve the Amendment 2 debate this year. Amendment 2, passed by state voters last November, hasn't taken effect because of a court injunction. But if ultimately upheld, the constitutional amendment would eliminate gay-rights ordinances in Denver, Boulder and Aspen, and would ban any entity in Colorado from ever passing such laws. Gay activists in Denver supported Walta's decision, saying they need time for more organizing and education on gay rights before asking the state to vote on the issue again. For different reasons, Colorado for Family Values also commended Walta's action. The Colorado Springs-based architects and sponsors of Amendment 2 said Walta's plan failed because he was in effect asking voters to reverse their votes. "He was asking people to compromise thier moral convictions, and it's always dangerous to compromise those values," said Will Perkins, chairman of Colorado for Family Values. Colorado Springs gay activists, however, were angered and dismayed by Walta's decision and opposition to his compromise by gays in Denver and Boulder. Denver and Boulder gays, already protected by local laws, refused to back a plan that would extend some protections to gays in other cities, as well, said Robin Miller, a Colorado Springs attorney and longtime gay activist. "I'm very dispapointed," she said. "I thought it was a very reasonable solution to what really is a statewide problem. Denver wouldn't buy in; it's that simple. I think the gay and lesbian community lost a wonderful opportunity to get together on a statewide issue and politically marginalize the religious right." Walta said his biggest disappointment is that Colorado Springs remains mired in political turmoil created by Amendment 2 and Colorado for Family Values. Even if the courts overturn Amendment 2, the fighting already has cost the city millions of dollars in convention business and tarnished its national image. "Colorado Springs is facing a defining moment," Walta said. His proposal, suported by an unprecedented coalition of moderate and conservative business leaders in Colorado Srpings, specifically would have denied quotas, job preferences or other affirmative action measures to gays. But it also would have outlawed discrimination in jobs, housing or public services. Walta's list of exemptions to certain rights cost him support from many Denver and Boulder gay leaders. The exemptions said nonprofit groups such as the Boy Scouts could continue to discriminate against gays. Families could not be forced to hire gays as "household employees," including babysitters, an exemption that many gays said perpetuates the stereotype that homosexuals want to molest children. "It comes from the lie that we gays, lesbians and bisexuals are a threat to children," Denver activist Kat Morgan said. Morgan and other leaders say they now oppose efforts to overturn Amendment 2 by a vote or any alternative measure in 1993, preferring to organize for a gay rights campaign in 1994. "When people are in pain, they want a quick fix," Morgan said. "The problem is, when you put a Band-aid on a deep wound, it doesn't heal it. Amendment 2 is a really deep wound, really serious pain." Walta said he agrees with Denver political and business leaders who think they can defeat Amendment 2 in court. They predict the Colorado Supreme Court likely will uphold the injunction against Amendment 2 this summer, and Denver District Judge Jeff Bayless then will overturn the amendment itself when he hears a full lawsuit against it at an October trial. An "October surprise" from Bayless could have torpedoed a campaign for Walta's measure in November, said John Huggins, Denver's economic development director and a member of an anti-Amendment 2 coalition. Moreover, the state legislature might have blocked Walta's measure for other reasons. Both houses have given preliminary approval to a bill that would restrict fall 1993 elections to financial issues, denying access to Walta or any other Amendment 2-related issue. In addition, an Adams County district judge ruled yestrday that tax-limiting Amendment 1 is ambiguous as to whether non-financial issues can be put before voters in special elections. A fall election this year would be a special election. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Corrections, new info, and requests for info: amend2-info@cs.colorado.edu Administrative comments : amend2-mod@cs.colorado.edu General Discussion : amend2-discuss@cs.colorado.edu Boulder/Denver area local meetings/events : amend2-local@cs.colorado.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe to a list, send mail to Majordomo@cs.colorado.edu, with subscribe in the BODY of the message. For multiple lists, use multiple lines.